After Vote Success, NBC Asks: "What If the U.S. Fails in Iraq?"
--2/1/2005

the Steven P.J. Wood Senior Fellow and Vice President for Research and Publications

1.After Vote Success, NBC Asks: "What If the U.S. Fails in Iraq?"
NBC News decided that a night after the resounding success of the election in Iraq, in which the majority were not intimidated by the threat from the murderous insurgents, would be a good time to examine, as NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams put it, "The gamble in Iraq. What are the consequences if U.S. policy fails?" David Gregory acknowledged the election success, but insisted that "even on a day filled with hope for the future, Americans are forced to confront another possibility: What if the U.S. fails in Iraq?"

2.Chris Matthews Suggests U.S. Soldiers Forced Iraqis to Vote
Chris Matthews' animus toward President Bush's Iraq policy is so great that on Sunday night he raised the possibility that U.S. soldiers forced Iraqis to vote. He asked Brian Williams: "Was it that clean? Was there no pushing by American soldiers or coalition forces to make people vote or discourage them from not voting?" Williams rejected to notion of any coercion. On Friday night, Matthews foresaw disaster before Sunday's vote: "Is it likely we're going to see a massive, Tet-style, like we had in Vietnam, explosion of opposition over the next 24 hours? They're really gonna throw out everything they've had at these elections to try to bring them down?"

3.Dick Cavett Denounces "Stinking War," Bush "Sold Bill of Goods"
Television talk show host veteran Dick Cavett expressed his revulsion for the Iraq war. Appearing on the Chris Matthews Show over the weekend, Cavett denounced "this stinking war" and asserted that "I feel awful about the youngsters, pardon the expression, who are going over and getting their brains blown out." He later insisted that military families should be "awfully embarrassing to the administration" since they were "sold a bill of goods and then" their loved ones "come back in their flag-draped coffins and can't be photographed."

4.Kurtz Chides Media for Overplay of Post Attack on Cheney's Parka
Noting how "it was all over cable the day the article appeared," Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz, in a Monday chat session, contended that "Parkagate," a story line launched by an attack on Cheney's wardrobe by the Post, "was a bit overplayed." In a piece showcased across the top of Friday's "Style" section, Robin Givhan complained that at the Thursday ceremony to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, Cheney, who sported a dark green parka, "was dressed in the kind of attire one typically wears to operate a snow blower." Kurtz pointed out that Cheney is "a heart patient and it was freezing cold there" and suggested that "there are better things to criticize Cheney about."

NBC News decided that a night after the resounding success of the election in Iraq, in which the majority were not intimidated by the threat from the murderous insurgents, would be a good time to examine, as NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams put it, "The gamble in Iraq. What are the consequences if U.S. policy fails?" David Gregory acknowledged the election success, but insisted that "even on a day filled with hope for the future, Americans are forced to confront another possibility: What if the U.S. fails in Iraq?"

From Kuwait, Williams plugged an upcoming story: "When NBC Nightly News continues this Monday night, a key question for the administration and the nation: The gamble in Iraq. What are the consequences if U.S. policy fails?"

Williams set up the subsequent story on the January 31 newscast: "NBC News 'In Depth' tonight, more on Iraq's historic election, and one of the winners, as we've been discussing, is President Bush. The President has already declared yesterday's vote a triumphant moment in his effort to spur democracy in the Middle East. Still, the job in Iraq is far from over. NBC's David Gregory has more tonight on why the stakes are so high."

David Gregory began, as checked against the closed-captioning by the MRC's Brad Wilmouth: "War and the first spark of democracy in Iraq [image of inked finger] represent the great gamble of the Bush presidency." George W. Bush, September 23, 2004: "I believe that when we succeed in Iraq that America will be more secure." Gregory: "Success, it's argued, would be much bigger than one country's transformation." Bush, same event: "A free Iraq will send a clear message to the part of the world that is desperate for freedom." Gregory: "Because a democratic Iraq, argues one supporter of the war, would make Osama bin Laden and his disciples less popular." David Frum, former Bush speechwriter: "It undercuts the whole poisonous lie of jihad terrorism, which is that it is the killers who represent the aspirations of the people of the region." Gregory, from the White House lawn, insisted: "With stakes so high, even on a day filled with hope for the future, Americans are forced to confront another possibility. What if the U.S. fails in Iraq?" Frum: "The consequences would be grave for the Iraqis themselves. They would face civil war." Gregory, over video of street battles: "Radicals throughout the region would be emboldened. Terrorists would find new havens. America's image as a strong power would be undermined. Middle East expert Shibley Telhami:" Shibley Telhami, Middle East analyst: "U.S. deterrence will be undermined. People will say, 'This is the biggest country, but it couldn't get this done.'" Gregory: "Telhami says there is another fear, that most Arabs will not be inspired by a democratic Iraq." Telhami: "What they see in Iraq, most of them don't interpret as real democracy. And what they see in Iraq is the violence and anarchy which they fear." Gregory concluded: "Still, some analysts argue that in the end, the U.S. could lose Iraq and still win the region. Stability in Afghanistan, a de-nuclearized Iran, or a breakthrough in the Arab-Israeli dispute. Yet for now, it's Iraq that looms the largest for this President, who has wagered that success there means security here. David Gregory, NBC News, the White House."

Chris Matthews' animus toward President Bush's Iraq policy is so great that on Sunday night he raised the possibility that U.S. soldiers forced Iraqis to vote. He asked Brian Williams: "Was it that clean? Was there no pushing by American soldiers or coalition forces to make people vote or discourage them from not voting?" Williams rejected to notion of any coercion. On Friday night, Matthews foresaw disaster before Sunday's vote: "Is it likely we're going to see a massive, Tet-style, like we had in Vietnam, explosion of opposition over the next 24 hours? They're really gonna throw out everything they've had at these elections to try to bring them down?"

The MRC's Geoff Dickens caught the Matthews-Williams exchange which took place a bit past 7pm EST on Sunday, in the second half of a two-hour Hardball. After Williams, in Iraq, said Americans had to realize our image of Chicago ward politics does not match a different way Iraqi politics works, Matthews asked: "Speaking of Chicago, and I want to get back to your initial sort of sensitive, I think almost picturesque notion of today's meaning, people going to the polls of their own volition, going not because they are taxed a certain amount, like they are in certain countries, for not voting. There's no penalty for not voting, no prize for voting, except the honor of doing so. Was it that clean? Was there no pushing by American soldiers or coalition forces to make people vote or discourage them from not voting? Was it a clean turnout, in other words?" Williams rejected the premise: "I think it was. Look, coalition forces, were they involved in the get-out-the-vote effort? You bet they were, to the extent that part of their job was to make the way safe for people to go to the polls. And now it can be told there was a whole lot of subterfuge. There were fake polling places with signs out front in Arabic saying, you know, voting here on Sunday. And they were always fakes. And they were waiting to see how many of them got their doors blown off and who the insurgents were who drove up in the dark of night to wire them to go off. And then, come this morning, voting day, a whole new bunch of polling places opened up. "Coercion, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find that. Look, the new badge of honor in Iraq today was this indelible ink. In some places, it was purple. In others, it was a darker, almost black. It, it is going to take a long time to wash off. And there's a terrific metaphor there. It says, 'I voted. I braved what was a palpable, pre-announced danger, and I voted.' Those wearing it are happy it's going to take a long time to wash off."

On Friday's Hardball, Matthews assumed the worst. He proposed to his guest panel: "Well, let me ask you about a rather deadly scenario here, a nightmare scenario. If we have a lot of suicide bombers, if we have a lot of people walking in armed with explosives into polling areas where they really do hit the inside of the operation, is that gonna to hurt the legitimacy of the elections?"

Reporter Campbell Brown checked in from Baghdad with a dire warning. Matthews asked her: "What does it smell like over there? Do you sense fireworks?" She affirmed: "You do, Chris. We're in the Green Zone. We're reporting from the Green Zone. And I think, here, you feel a little bit cut off from what's happening out on the street, because it is so fortified here. You don't get that sense of danger. But I have been out on patrol the last couple of days with the 1st Cavalry. And on the street, you get the sense that something big is about to happen, something big and fairly ugly. People are lined up in their cars. Traffic is snarled in gas lines. People are shopping, stocking up on supplies, planning not to leave their homes, frankly, for the next couple of days. And it is almost eerily calm, a sense that there may be spectacular violence. We don`t know if it gonna happen, obviously. David reported about it earlier, these reports of many suicide bombers, sleeper suicide bombers that could be women, perhaps, sort of the unexpected or car bombs sitting in garages waiting to be detonated. And everybody has that sense. It is sort of this hushed anxiety of waiting for something to happen."

Matthews soon turned to New York Times White House reporter Elisabeth Bumiller: "I guess there's two questions I'm gonna ask you, they're both rough. You may not have an answer to either one. Is it likely we're going to see a massive, Tet-style, like we had in Vietnam, explosion of opposition over the next 24 hours? They're really gonna throw out everything they've had at these elections to try to bring them down?" Bumiller rationally refused to speculate: "Chris, I have absolutely no idea. I'm sitting here in Washington. The White House doesn't think so."

Television talk show host veteran Dick Cavett expressed his revulsion for the Iraq war. Appearing on the Chris Matthews Show over the weekend, Cavett denounced "this stinking war" and asserted that "I feel awful about the youngsters, pardon the expression, who are going over and getting their brains blown out." He later insisted that military families should be "awfully embarrassing to the administration" since they were "sold a bill of goods and then" their loved ones "come back in their flag-draped coffins and can't be photographed."

Not to be confused with his MSNBC program, The Chris Matthews Show is a pre-taped half-hour weekly show produced by NBC and mostly carried by NBC stations on Sunday mornings, though in some markets it airs on non-NBC stations.

On the January 30 edition, likely taped on Friday, NBC's Andrea Mitchell, New York Times columnist David Brookes and the BBC's Katty Kay appeared as guests along with Cavett.

Matthews' provocative opening: "Birth of a nation? Will elections unite Iraq or ignite civil war? Will this weekend's vote create a country or demolish it? Who's the boss? Can the new Iraq president tell our President and our troops when to go? Will we let him?!"

Matthews soon proposed: "First up, birth of a nation? For Iraqis, a moment teeming with risk and potential: liberation or devastation."

Matthews suggested a dire scenario to Cavett: "The minute this election is counted, in the next couple of days, we'll have a good idea of how it's being, how it's going. In the next several weeks, we'll know a clear-cut count. Suppose it's like our own situation in 1860, where one side wins, the people want to get rid of slavery, the expanse of slavery, win, and the ones who want to keep slavery lose. The ones who lose say, 'Wait a minute, we can't live without slavery. We're going to war. We're gonna have a civil war.' 600,000 people dead in our country. What stops the losers in this election to say, 'We're not gonna join this new government. We didn't vote. We're not gonna show up. We're gonna secede?' Dick?" Cavett, the MRC's Geoff Dickens observed, agreed: "Exactly. I mean, sorry, that isn't the kind of answer you like on a talk show, is it?" Matthews: "No." Cavett: "The whole thing, to me, I, I'm really a pessimist. I gave up a long time ago on this whole thing, this stinking war. And I feel awful about the youngsters, pardon the expression, who are going over and getting their brains blown out. There was one kid who was, a little town in Arizona or somewhere. He'd never been anywhere except two other towns. And he wrote in a diary his first day, 'Think of all the things I'm going to see.' And he was killed, of course, two days later."

Later, Matthews asked: "Okay, let me start with this, right around the room here. Katty Kay, three years from now, we're going to be picking a new, new president. The caucuses in Iowa are gonna be happening, the primaries. At that time, in early 2007, will we still have troops in Iraq getting killed? In 2008." Katty Kay: "If I have to say a yes or a no, I would say yes." Matthews: "We'll still have troops getting killed in 2008. Dick Cavett?" Cavett: "We may have, for the awful reason that the people who said, 'My son was killed over there, but he was serving his country.' Those people, I would think, would be awfully, awfully embarrassing to the administration, who, if they have been sold a bill of goods and then are embarrassing when they come back in their flag-draped coffins and can't be photographed." Matthews: Okay, are we still going to have people there three years from now, fighting and getting killed?" Andrea Mitchell: "Sadly, I think, yes."

Matthews always ends with the gimmick of asking his guests to "tell me something I don't know." Cavett answered: "Hope you don't know this. President Bush, later in the year, will announce that he's been kidding us all along and knows there is no such word as 'nucular.'"

Cavett is a veteran talk show host who, when hosting a late night ABC show from 1969 to 1972, devoted one show to a debate between John Kerry and John O'Neill. A few years ago, he had a weekend program on MSNBC. He now hosts a show in Britain.

Noting how "it was all over cable the day the article appeared," Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz, in a Monday chat session, contended that "Parkagate," a story line launched by an attack on Cheney's wardrobe by the Post, "was a bit overplayed." In a piece showcased across the top of Friday's "Style" section, Robin Givhan complained that at the Thursday ceremony to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, Cheney, who sported a dark green parka, "was dressed in the kind of attire one typically wears to operate a snow blower." Kurtz pointed out that Cheney is "a heart patient and it was freezing cold there" and suggested that "there are better things to criticize Cheney about."

The January 31 CyberAlert reported: The Washington Post on Friday plastered, across the entire width of the top of the front page of the "Style" section, an opinionated critique of Vice President Dick Cheney's attire. "Dick Cheney, Dressing Down: Parka, Ski Cap at Odds With Solemnity of Auschwitz Ceremony," read the headline over the article by Robin Givhan who complained that at the Thursday ceremony to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the death camp, Cheney "was dressed in the kind of attire one typically wears to operate a snow blower." She explained his transgression: "Cheney stood out in a sea of black-coated world leaders because he was wearing an olive drab parka with a fur-trimmed hood." The AP and Reuters soon picked up the story as well as CNN's Inside Politics, PBS's Washington Week and MSNBC Countdown on which Alison Stewart hyped it as "the fashion faux pas that's becoming an international incident."

For an excerpt of Givhan's attack as well as how the cited shows picked up on it, see the January 31 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org

Washington, D.C.: "Was visiting the in-laws in Raleigh this weekend and noted that Robin Givhan's story on VP Cheney's attire at Auschwitz got a mention in the A Section of the News & Observer. It was also discussed vigorously in Dan Froomkin's chat last week. Did anyone else pick up Parkagate?" Howard Kurtz: "It was all over cable the day the article appeared. The whole thing was a bit overplayed, in my view. The guy is a heart patient and it was freezing cold there. Seems to me there are better things to criticize Cheney about."

Federal employees and military personnel can donate to the Media Research Center through the Combined Federal Campaign or CFC. To donate to the MRC, use CFC #12489. Visit the CFC website for more information about giving opportunities in your workplace.